퇴계와 율곡의 명대 유학 인식

Abstract

In this article, I will examine how 16th century Joseon scholars, T’oegye Yi Hwang and Yulgok Yi Yi, perceive the Ming Dynasty Confucianism. T’oegye takes an inclusive attitude toward the Ming Dynasty academic in terms of the succession of “This culture of ours”, and Yulgok has a critical stance on the Ming Dynasty academic in terms of the “Genealogy of Dao”. Based on this general understanding, they pay attention to distinct points and set different boundary lines of criticism. T’oegye places importance on Supplementary Annotations to the Classic on the Mind-and-Heart. It is because he wants to understand Zhu Xi studies mainly in the practice of Gyeong(敬). On the other hand, Yulgok partially acknowledges the position of Luo Jin Shun, and uses it to spread his own claims. This reflects his interest in explaining the world and human as a unified structure through the assertion that “Li and Gi are combined”. Meanwhile, although T’oegye comes to learn in his later life that Cheng Min Zheng, the compiler of Supplementary Annotations to the Classic on the Mind-and-Heart is a scholar that leans toward Xianshan studies, he still holds Cheng’s book in high esteem even after learning that fact. Instead, T’oegye delicately criticizes scholars of Yangming studies for denying investigating Li and Five Relationships. Unlike T’oegye, Yulgok completely agrees with the argument of Chen Jian who criticized Xianshan studies and Yangming studies. We can infer that Yulgok in fact is critical of Supplementary Annotations to the Classic on the Mind-and-Heart. Although T’oegye and Yulgok regard themselves as Zhuxi scholars and criticize the flow of Yangming studies, they understand the Confucianism of Ming Dynasty from different perspectives. As I think, their different understandings become controversial among Confucian scholars of Joseon.